The lawsuit fundamentally has merit. It asks a huge open question that no one knows the answer to. The outcome will be extraordinarily impactful. The question must be answered at some point.
The case has merit even if NYT loses across the board.
AI might be the defining issue of copyright law for decades. There are so many open questions, and this seems like just the start.
agreed. in the same way Colorado supreme court ruled trump can't be on the ballot to force scotus to rule i think is the same reasoning here. get an answer earlier rather than later.
> [1] On the most important factor, possible economic damage to the copyright owner, [Judge] Chin wrote that "Google Books enhances the sales of books to the benefit of copyright holders."
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,....
So at any point OpenAI could declare that a sufficient degree of AGI has been achieved and thus return to its philanthropic mission. With GPLed models and all.
However, at this point the employees expect a multi-million cash-out for each of them. So the philanthropic mission seems to be gone out the window.
And probably that’s also the way Sam Altman got back into the CEO role. By maximizing the expected eventual cash-out for the employees which threatened to leave otherwise.
The response from MSFT's legal team would be biblical if openai pulled this.
